politicalpartypoop.com

Horrorfest 2006:
House Intel Cmte Chair Hastings?
House Judic. Cmte Chair Conyers?
Sen. Educ&Labor Chair Kennedy?
House Taxat’n Chair Rangel?
Speaker of the House Pelosi?

WATCH HERE

IN CASE YOU FORGOT - Link
In 1989, Hastings was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives for corruption and perjury. The Democratic-controlled Senate convicted Judge Hastings of accepting a $150,000 bribe in 1981 in exchange for a lenient sentence. He became only the sixth Judge in the history of impeachment in the United States to be removed from office by the United States Senate.

His impeachment was remanded back to the Senate by Judge Stanley Sporkin for procedural reasons, but the Supreme Court ruled in a similar case, regarding Judge Walter Nixon, who had also been impeached and removed, that the courts had no jurisdiction to review Senate impeachment procedures. Hastings’ case was dismissed, and his impeachment and removal remained valid.

The Senate had the option to forbid Hastings from ever seeking federal office again when it removed him, but did not do so.

 From Hot Air - Sen. John Kerry held a press conference moments ago (2:45edt)  to address a controversial remark he made implying those who are uneducated serve in the military and get stuck in Iraq. Kerry made it “crystal clear” that he apologizes to no one, adding his remarks were a “botched joke” about the President, not the troops.

Press Conference Video HERE.

The liberal bloggers will try and get their shit together and come up with excuses for “Herman”
But his attacks on the military are not new.

Posted by JOCUSN on Newsbusters - December 6, 2005 - 09:42.

On Sunday’s edition of CBS’s “Face the Nation”, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) said in an interview with Bob Schieffer that U.S. troops were terrorizing Iraqi women and children. 

Here’s a blurb from the transcript:

“And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the–of–the historical customs, religious customs.” 

And then he tells us who needs to be terrorizing the women and children:

“Whether you like it or not…  Iraqis should be doing that. And after all of these two and a half years, with all of the talk of 210,000 people trained, there just is no excuse for not transferring more of that authority.”

Once again, John Kerry shows us his disdain for the military and the lies he will spread to further the twisted agenda of the Democratic Party.  With everything else heard from Rep. Murtha and Howard Dean in recent days, it’s clear the liberal left doesn’t want democracy to take hold in Iraq.  They want us to fail so they can prop themselves up for the ‘06 and ‘08 elections.

You can read the entire transcript from Sunday’s “Face the Nation” at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/18/ftn/main856364.shtml. 

x

OH NOW WE’RE THE NUTS! Man I need to send Kerry a gift, the Democrats must be having a collective meltdown. 

By Nathan Burchfiel - CNSNews.com Staff Writer - Link
October 31, 2006

(1st Add: Includes additional comments from White House Press Secretary Tony Snow.)

(CNSNews.com) - Raising eyebrows and infuriating conservatives, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in a speech Monday encouraged young people to get an education or “get stuck in Iraq.”

“Education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well,” Kerry told students in Pasadena while campaigning for California gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides.

“If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq,” he added.

The comment set off a firestorm on conservative websites, with some commentators accusing him of “elitism,” and of “smearing” the troops by implying that they are uneducated.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) called on Kerry to apologize Tuesday.

In a statement posted on his political action committee’s website, McCain said Kerry “owes an apology to the many thousands of Americans serving in Iraq, who answered their country’s call because they are patriots and not because of any deficiencies in their education.”

“The suggestion that only the least educated Americans would agree to serve in the military and fight in Iraq, is an insult to every soldier serving in combat,” McCain said.

In a statement released Tuesday, Kerry accused White House Press Secretary Tony Snow and “assorted right-wing nut-jobs” of distorting the comments “to divert attention from their disastrous record.”

Snow told a press briefing Tuesday Kerry “not only owes an apology to those who are serving, but also to the families of those who’ve given their lives in this.”

“This is an absolute insult, and I’m a little astonished that he didn’t figure it out already.” Snow added.

“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they’re crazy,” Kerry said.

“I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.”

DUDE SOUNDS PISSED….I WONDER WHY?  LOL!

From Wizbang 

Hot Air has the audio. 

Michelle Malkin has a lot of seething reaction.

This is why I believe that the Democrats won’t win next week.
These people lead by the likes of John Kerry, these people are the biggest bunch of moronic dolts I have ever seen.
You Democrats had this election won, it was yours for the taking, all you had to do was run a clean quiet campaign, but NOOOOOOO!
You continue to put your foot in your mouths.
I’m praying Republicans will wake up and not allow these crazy bastards to take over.

MORE REACTION…

Webloggin - John Kerry Calls Military Members Dumb                                                                                

Miller’s Time - Idiots On Parade Part XI…   

Y.A.C.R.W.B - John Kerry: Supports Our Troops?

Sister Toldjah - And this man could have been president, part 2: How John Kerry “supports the troops”

Murdoc Online - This man was close to being our President

 

                                                                                                                                                       

Hugh Hewitt has a few words about the dishonorable Senator Kerry:

has a few words about the dishonorable Senator Kerry:

has a few words about the dishonorable Senator Kerry: The Kerry sneer is part and parcel of the Pelosi Democrats, just as the attempt to suppress the votes of military serving overseas in the Florida recount is part of the Democratic Party legacy.There is a reason why an overwhelming majority of the military supports the president and votes GOP. They know the contempt most of the left feels for them and their mission, and they won’t be fooled by appearances at Veteran’s Day parades.

Any vote for any Democrat is not only a vote against victory and a vote for vulnerability. It is also a vote against the military. “End up in Iraq” if you don’t study hard and do your homework? Simply disgusting. What a miserable man.

 

UPDATE - Just a little curious, so I went to the following blogs as of (Noon central), these are the ones I read often and NONE had anything about the John Kerry flap.
This tells me everything I need to know about what the liberal Democrats think of this.
“OH SHIT, HE SAID WHAT!?”  
Fire Dog Lake
Huffington Post
America Blog
Kos
The News Blog
JABBS
Media Matters
My DD
Liberal Oaisis
Pandagon
Oliver Willis
Eschaton
Talk Left
Dem Bloggers
Crooks and Liars

UPDATE II -  I finally found a liberal blog that posted something 

While I disagree with Kerry on the troops’ IQ levels, I agree that they are generally uneducated, and that is the problem. They don’t go to college because they can’t afford to, apparently poverty is a concept that does not factor in Kerry’s political calculations.

Let Snoop be real clear here. This is not about woo hoo, Black Democrats are supporting a Republican. This is about black folks waking up and leveraging their vote.
Democrats have been screwing over black folks for years. The tide seems to be turning blacks are not buying into the Democrat bullshit and are finally taking action.
Democrats, liberals, the liberal media and liberal bloggers can continue to ignore the significance of the black vote if they want.
If this trend continues the Democratic Party is toast.

By S.A. Miller and Jon Ward
THE WASHINGTON TIMES 

Former Prince George’s County Executive Wayne K. Curry and five fellow black Democrats on the county council excoriated their party yesterday and endorsed Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele, a Republican, for U.S. Senate.

“The [Democratic] Party acts as though when they want our opinion, they’ll give it to us. It’s not going to be like that anymore,” said Mr. Curry, who in 1994 became the county’s first black executive and remains influential in the mostly black and heavily Democratic county.

Mr. Curry and the lawmakers said Democratic leaders repeatedly have snubbed the black community and their county, noting the lack of party support for the Senate campaign of former National Association for the Advancement of Colored People chief Kweisi Mfume, who lost the Democratic primary to Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin.

The Democratic ticket lacks black candidates, they said, and candidates from Prince George’s County, which is home to more than 320,000 registered Democrats – the most of any jurisdiction in Maryland.
“We’re not puppets. We’re not gullible,” Mr. Curry said during a press conference at the Infusion Tea Cafe in Largo. “This ain’t the first time we’ve charged up a hill.”
He was joined by fellow black Democrats David Harrington of Bladensburg, Samuel H. Dean of Bowie, Camille A. Exum of Capitol Heights, Tony Knotts of Temple Hills and Marilyn Bland of Clinton — all officials on the nine-member county council.

Other black Democratic leaders endorsing Mr. Steele yesterday included Major Riddick, former chief of staff for former Gov. Parris N. Glendening; Ron Lipscomb, a major fundraiser and trustee of the state party; and businessmen Clayton Duhaney and M.A. “Mike” Little.
“There’s a revolution going on here,” said Jerry McLaurin, a county developer and Steele supporter who attended the announcement. “This is going to radiate throughout the county like an explosion.”
Mr. Steele, who lives in the county and is the first black to be elected to statewide office in Maryland, said he was “humbled.”

“As I started this campaign, I said to myself I didn’t want this to be so much about party as about people, and these individuals seem to understand and appreciate that as well,” he said.
The endorsements were issued as Democratic officials are scrambling to secure their most loyal bloc — black voters.

Mr. Curry said the Steele endorsements are “the continuation of a long civil rights struggle.”
Mr. Dean, a former council chairman who was elected in 2002 with 93 percent of the vote, said blacks have had a one-sided relationship with the Democratic Party since they shifted allegiance from the Republican Party in 1932.
“We were in the Democratic Party while they were lynching black folks. We were in the Democratic Party while they were segregating folks,” Mr. Dean said. “We have been loyal Democrats, [but] when the party has an opportunity to do something to show that their base is recognized, appreciated and acknowledged, they don’t.”

“The issue is what we want not only from the state party but from the national party,” he said. “Give us respect. We cannot continue to be in the room but not allowed to come to the table. What we are doing now is saying, ‘Forget it. We are not going to wait for you to bring us to the table. We are going to not only get to the table, we are going to take it.’ “

Other Maryland Democratic leaders — such as U.S. House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer, Prince George’s County Executive Jack B. Johnson and Delegate Anthony G. Brown of Prince George’s County, who is running for lieutenant governor — declined to comment.

A Cardin campaign spokesman did not return calls.
Mr. Cardin, a white 10-term congressman from Baltimore, said this weekend that his “message to the African-American community and to all communities is that we’ve got to change the priorities in Washington.”
“You’re twice as likely to be without health insurance if you’re African-American. So, yes, [black voters are] concerned about a senator who’s going to stand up for universal health coverage. I will. Michael Steele won’t. He supports George Bush’s policies,” Mr. Cardin said.

Mr. Curry said that Mr. Steele is a “good man with a good plan,” and although he differs with some of Mr. Steele’s views, he also differs with some of the Democratic Party’s platform.
He said the lieutenant governor is “most responsive to the things that will make our futures brighter.”

Found the post below on Right Wing News about the Democrats pimp daddy George Soros. In case you forgot: 

In an interview with The Washington Post on November 11, 2003 ([7]), Soros said that removing George W. Bush from office was the “central focus of my life” and “a matter of life and death.” He joked that he would sacrifice his entire fortune to defeat Bush, and many continue to state this as Soros’s position even after Soros clarified the humorous nature of the statement in a Q&A session at the end of his March 3, 2004 address to California’s Commonwealth Club.Soros gave $3 million to the Center for American Progress, committed $5 million to MoveOn, while he and his friend Peter Lewis each gave America Coming Together $10 million. (All were groups that worked to support Democrats in the 2004 election.)

—————

If you ask me, this excerpt from an interview with George Soros is a little bit creepy and cold blooded, especially coming from a guy who could just as well have been a target of the Nazi death squads instead of making money off of them.

Sweetness & Light and Thomas Lifson documented the chilling 60 Minutes interview with financier George Soros. Soros — who donated around $25 million to various efforts to defeat President Bush in 2004 — survived the Holocaust as a 14-year old. He did so using the only means available: forged papers, which attested that he was the Christian godson of a government official.

While hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were being shipped off to death camps, Soros assisted his faux godfather with official duties, including confiscating property from the Jews.

Steve Kroft: And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps.

George Soros: Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that’s when my character was made…

Steve Kroft: …My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.

George Soros: Yes. Yes.

Steve Kroft: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.

George Soros: Yes. That’s right. Yes.

Steve Kroft: I mean, that’s—that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?

George Soros: Not-not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don’t - you don’t see the connection. But it created no-no problem at all.

Steve Kroft: No feeling of guilt?

George Soros: No.

Steve Kroft: For example that, ‘I’m Jewish and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be there. I should be there.’ None of that?

George Soros: Well, of course I c-I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was-well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in markets- that if I weren’t there- of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would-would-would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the-whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the-I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.

Soros is right that he didn’t send any Jews to the gas chamber, but every time a Jewish family was sent off to their deaths, it helped put money in the pocket of George Soros. In other words, George Soros was making money off of the Nazi’s genocide and he doesn’t feel bad about it. If that’s the environment in which his, “character was made,” that really doesn’t say much for his character.

Why he matters:

“I feel it’s very important for Democrats to win control of the House, and I am supporting efforts to do that. I am really concerned about America. In a way, we have the wrong leadership. But we also have the wrong followership. People don’t care about the truth.”

George Soros, whose opposition to President Bush’s conduct of the war on terror caused him to pour millions of dollars into the effort to defeat the president, made a substantial donation to the defense fund for radical lawyer Lynne Stewart, who last week was found guilty of giving aid to Islamic terrorists. Link

 Mac Johnson - Human Events - Link
Although the basic philosophy of conservatism is optimistic (a belief in the individual’s ability to succeed if left alone by government is at the core of the movement, after all), conservatives tend to be chronically depressed when it comes to politics and elections.

Not only does government seem to grow ad nauseum with each passing year (especially under Democrats or George Bush), but a healthy touch of pessimism is a natural consequence of responsibility. Imagining what can go wrong is how responsible adults plan for the future. And conservatives are, disproportionately, among the responsible part of the population—responsible for paying the taxes, fighting the wars, raising the children, and running the businesses.  

So it is not surprising that conservatives have a tendency to see the worst in every political event. This means that oftentimes conservatives completely overlook when they have actually won a major victory—concentrating instead on spotting the next potential defeat. This is what has occurred regarding the battle over illegal immigration and amnesty this past year.

At the beginning of 2006, the constellations were in perfect alignment for the forces of open borders and amnesty. Ready to push for amnesty—and the next flood of illegal alien interlopers it would bring- was the mainstream media, nearly all Congressional Democrats, President Bush and Karl Rove, John McCain and much of the Senate leadership of the GOP, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page and its disciples, sellout union “leaders,” corrupt corporations, every ethnic grievance group in the country, a number of imbecile bishops, academia, the rabid moonbat left, 20 million street-storming illegal aliens, and every weenie in America afraid of being called a racist.

All amnesty opponents had going for them was the wishes of a majority of the American people and the rank-and-file Republicans in Congress. And yet amnesty was defeated in a spectacular fashion. Many conservatives, who were angry that the victory had to be achieved over the political carcasses of our own President and Senate leaders, did not appreciate the scale and significance of this victory at the time. An army that has to mutiny just to be able to fight the enemy is inherently demoralized by that fact.

Given such circumstances, it’s easy to resort to jaded and safe clichés such as “there’s no difference between the two parties.”  But the simple fact is there’s a huge difference between the parties on the amnesty issue: Republicans are divided over it, with most opposing amnesty. For Democrats there is no such division—they wholeheartedly support amnesty.

H.R. 4437, the bill establishing increased border security efforts and rejecting amnesty, was supported by 203 of 231 (88%) Republicans in the House—only 17 voted against it. By contrast, only 36 Democrats (18%) voted for the bill, 164 voted against it, hoping to pass an amnesty instead. In the Senate, the only opposition to amnesty came from Republicans—60% of them opposed it. 93% of Senate Democrats supported amnesty.

That’s the choice this election presents for opponents of open borders: support the Republicans that rose up against their leadership to oppose amnesty, or support the Democrats who will gleefully pass an amnesty just as soon as they are sworn in and able.

And here’s the real kicker: booting Republicans from control of the House to punish George Bush and John McCain for their ludicrous border policies will have the ironic effect of ensuring they finally get the amnesty they want. If Democrats win big next week, the Senate will resurrect their amnesty bill, a Democrat controlled House will pass it, and there can be no doubt that President George W. Bush will sign it with far more fanfare and enthusiasm than he displayed when he signed the bill initiating construction of 700 miles of border fence—a bill that Republican Congressman forced on him in response to voter pressure.

In short, voting Democrat, or not voting at all, merely amounts to cutting off our Tancredo to spite our Bush. It would be throwing away the tremendous victory we have won this year and, worse, set in motion a tsunami of increased illegal immigration.

Today’s illegal immigration problem is a direct result of the 1986 amnesty. Far from “solving” the relatively small illegal alien problem America had then (3 million), it made the problem far, far worse by sending the message out to all the world that the secret to a better life in America was to just get here: sneak in, lie your way in, buy your way in, but just get here and we will let you stay, forgive you, and eventually make you a citizen.

And the world heard the message. Today the population of immigration criminals hiding in America waiting for the next amnesty is 12 million to 20 million. We cannot afford another such amnesty solution. The only way to undo the damage of the 1986 amnesty is to put aside talk of new amnesties or guest worker scams and begin to vigorously enforce the laws on immigration.

In the long term, illegal immigration may be the biggest threat facing the United States. Americans are only 5% of the world’s population. If the borders are thrown completely open by another amnesty, we face the very real prospect of being made a minority in what used to be our country.

If, as a voter, you are concerned about illegal immigration and border security, then a Republican Congress is currently the best insurance policy you can buy—not just against Democrats in Congress, but against the Republican in the White House as well.

The next battle for our borders occurs Tuesday, November 7, at a polling place near you. Vote. Or you can spend the day in Spanish class.

By Halimah Abdullah - Link

The rocky marriage of religion and politics was tested again last weekend when Democratic Senate candidate Harold Ford Jr. criticized the GOP’s approach to faith.
During a stop Saturday in Paris, Tenn., Ford said one of the hallmarks of the Democratic Party is that members don’t “use the Bible to judge people.”

He then quoted from the Bible about “the spirit of fear,” and living in the spirit of love, and he paraphrased U.S. Rep. Lincoln Davis, D-Tenn.
“My friend Lincoln Davis, who chairs this campaign, says there is one big difference between us and … Republicans when it comes to our faith,” Ford said. “He said ‘Republicans fear the Lord. Democrats fear and love the Lord.’”

After Saturday night’s debate in Nashville, Ford told reporters that the comment wasn’t directed at Corker.

“I just made the point … people who go around and try to judge other people are to be real careful,” Ford said.

However, Republican opponent Bob Corker’s campaign and supporters said the comments crossed the line.

“If Harold Ford believes what he said about our relationship with God is true, then it’s incredibly disturbing,” Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said in a prepared statement. “It’s outrageous for Harold Ford to say that someone’s love for the Lord depends on their political views — and it is offensive to all Tennesseans who want their next senator to bring people together, not divide them.”

Religious rehetoric has “been used fairly effectively by Ford to insulate himself against personal attacks,” said Bruce Oppenheimer, a political science professor at Vanderbilt University. “Clearly the turning point of this was the ad in the church.”

Ford’s ad, filmed inside Mt. Moriah East Baptist Church in Orange Mound, was widely hailed by pundits as successful and criticized by some civil liberty and interfaith groups as questionable.

“The recent rush of candidates-political parties — and their often aggressive tactics — to reach out to ‘people of faith’ lures religious organizations and religious leaders into dangerous legal territory,” C. Welton Gaddy, president of the 185,000-member Interfaith Alliance, wrote in a letter last month to the national chairmen of the Republican and Democratic parties.

“We didn’t mix religion and politics,” Ford told an interfaith gathering at a prayer breakfast in Chattanooga earlier this month after quoting from Ephesians. “I am who I am. I can’t step out of who I am when I go to work.”

The National Republican Senatorial Committee released a commercial that borrowed heavily from Ford’s church ad and questioned his God-focused image in light of his attendance at a Playboy-sponsored party last year.

Behind the back-and-forth is a battle over religious voters, a demographic that in previous election years has helped turn out the Republican vote. This month, a Gallup poll found white religious voters “equally as likely to say they will vote Democratic as Republican,” a dramatic shift from their strong Republican leanings expressed in surveys conducted earlier in the year.

“One of the things the Republicans have done very well over the last 20 years or so is make religion one of their cornerstones,” said John Geer, a political science professor at Vanderbilt University. “The Democrats don’t want to give that ground up. Religion isn’t Democratic or Republican.”

By Walter Williams - Townhall.com 

There are only a handful of products that Americans import that cannot be produced at home and therefore create jobs for Americans. Let’s look at a few of them.

We import cocoa from Ghana and coffee from African and Latin American countries. We import saffron from Spain and India and cinnamon from Sri Lanka. In fact, India produces 86 percent of the world tonnage of spices. There’s absolutely no reason these products cannot be produced by Americans, and we could be cocoa, coffee and spices independent.

You say, “Williams, that’s crazy! We don’t have the climate and soil conditions to produce those products. Many spices, for example, require a moist tropical environment.” No problem. We have the technology whereby we can simulate both the soil and weather conditions. We could build greenhouses in which to grow cinnamon trees and get our scientists to create the same soil conditions that exist in Sri Lanka. Greenhouses could also be built to simulate the climate conditions in Africa and Latin America to grow cocoa and coffee. In the case of cocoa, the greenhouses would have to be Superdome size to accommodate trees as high as 50 feet.

You say, “Williams, that’s still crazy! Imagine the high costs and the higher product prices of your crazy scheme.” I say, “Aha, you’re getting the picture.”

There are several nearly self-evident factors about our being cocoa, coffee and spices independent. Without a doubt, there would be job creation in our cocoa, coffee and spices industries, but consumers would pay a much higher price than they currently do. Therefore, nearly 300 million American consumers would be worse off, having to pay those higher prices or doing without, but those with the new jobs would be better off.

So let’s be honest with ourselves. Why do we choose to import cocoa, coffee and spices rather than produce them ourselves? The answer is that it is cheaper to do so. That means we enjoy a higher standard of living than if we tried to produce them ourselves. If we can enjoy, say, coffee, at a cheaper price than producing it ourselves, we have more money left over to buy other goods. That principle not only applies to cocoa, coffee and spices. It’s a general principle: If a good can be purchased more cheaply abroad, we enjoy a higher standard of living by trading than we would by producing it ourselves.

No one denies that international trade has unpleasant consequences for some workers. They have to find other jobs that might not pay as much, but should we protect those jobs through trade restrictions? The Washington-based Institute for International Economics has assembled data that might help with the answer. Tariffs and quotas on imported sugar saved 2,261 jobs during the 1990s. As a result of those restrictions, the average household pays $21 more per year for sugar. The total cost, nationally, sums to $826,000 for each job saved. Trade restrictions on luggage saved 226 jobs and cost consumers $1.2 million in higher prices for each job saved. Restrictions on apparel and textiles saved 168,786 jobs at a cost of nearly $200,000 for each job saved.

You might wonder how it is possible for, say, the sugar industry to rip off consumers. After all, consumers are far more numerous than sugar workers and sugar bosses. It’s easy. A lot is at stake for those in the sugar industry, workers and bosses. They dedicate huge resources to pressure Congress into enacting trade restrictions. But how many of us consumers will devote the same resources to unseat a congressman who voted for sugar restrictions that forced us to pay $21 more for the sugar our family uses? It’s the problem of visible beneficiaries of trade restrictions, sugar workers and bosses, gaining at the expense of invisible victims — sugar consumers. We might think of it as congressional price-gouging.

The GOP is the party of the rich, or so goes the conventional wisdom since the days of FDR.
By Peter Schweizer - National Review Online

Many Republicans, said Democratic-party chairman Howard Dean recently, “have never made an honest living in their lives.” Democratic activists have even set up a satirical website. And a liberal tax-exempt 527 group with the same name gets checks from anti-Bush billionaires such as Herb Sandler of Golden West Financial.

The GOP has historically been the party of both Main Street and Wall Street. But over the past decade, the plutocrats have increasingly become Democrats. Billionaires for Bush are increasingly outnumbered by billionaires who hate Bush. And Republicans in limousines are being outpaced by Democrats in Lear Jets.

With soft-money contributions banned, the super rich can now hope to sway elections with large checks to 527 advocacy groups such as MoveOn.org, Americans Coming Together, and the Media Fund, and by bundling contributions to candidates. Over the last four elections, the Democrats have dominated on both accounts. Consider these numbers, from the nonpartisan, non-profit Center for Responsive Politics (CRP): 

Thus far in 2006, 17 of the top 25 contributors to 527 advocacy groups are funding liberal/Democratic causes, including liberal billionaires George Soros, and Peter Lewis.

In 2004, Democrats made up 15 of the 25 individuals who gave more than $2 million to 527 groups. Of the Senate and House candidates who received “bundled” contributions that year, 9 out of the top 10 in the Senate and 8 out of 10 in the House were Democrats.

In 2002, those who gave a million dollars or more gave $36 million to the Democrats and only $3 million to Republicans, a 12:1 ratio. Those who gave $10,000 or more gave $140 million to the Democrats and just $111 million to Republicans. Of the top 10 individual contributors to candidates that year, only one gave to Republicans.

In 2000, Bush’s “Pioneers” received considerable press for their efforts to raise $100,000 each for the campaign. But the really big donors that year were Democrats. According to the lefty Mother Jones magazine, 18 of the top 25 individual donors to political campaigns were Democrats. In recent years, the Left has been obsessed with the role that the oil and natural-gas industry plays in funding the Republican candidates. Republicans are “in oil companies’ pockets,” says the DNC in one press release. In 2004, according to the CRP, the oil and gas industry pumped $25 million into campaigns, 80 percent of it to the GOP.

READ THE REST

Posted by Scott Whitlock on Newsbusters

Lynne Cheney was right. The Vice President’s wife recently attacked a CNN pre-election special as straight out of Democratic talking points. The program in question, “Broken Government: Power Play,” aired on October 26 and discussed presidential power. Reporter John King introduced his special that night on location at Independence Hall, Philadelphia. Close your eyes and it sounds like an ad straight out of the DNC:

John King: “Justice, on Mrs. Bush’s terms, would mean challenge after challenge, test after test of the balance of powers laid out in the Constitution, adopted here in Philadelphia’s Independence Hall 219 years ago, written by men, who, for all their brilliance, could not have imagined jet aircraft, let alone jet aircraft used as weapons. Nor could men determined to find the lasting antidote to tyranny have imagined the Internet, spy satellites, other technological advances now so central in the war on terror. But they did warn, in this hall, time and time again of too much presidential power, creating a careful system of checks by the Congress and the courts, lines the Bush administration, in the name of protecting Americans from another attack, has repeatedly stretched, rewritten, and sometimes just ignored.”

Mrs. Cheney appeared on “The Situation Room” the next day and had this to say about Mr. King’s special:

Lynne Cheney: “…I watched the program on CNN last night, which I thought — it’s your 2006 voter program, which I thought was a terrible distortion of both the President and the Vice President’s position on many issues. It seemed almost straight out of Democratic talking points using phrasing like ‘domestic surveillance’ when it’s not domestic surveillance that anyone has talked about or ever done. It’s surveillance of terrorists. It’s people who have al Qaeda connections calling into the United States. So I think we’re in the season of distortion, and this is just one more.”

A few seconds later, she bluntly restated her feelings on the special:

Cheney: “… Wolf, ‘Broken Government.’ Now, what, what kind of stance isthat?…So, you know, I shouldn’t let media bias surprise me, but I worked at CNN once… I watched your program last night and I was, I was troubled.”

READ THE REST HERE

Recently here in Lawrence Leonard Pitts gave a lecture where he was highly critical of the war in Iraq and Bush, typical anti war rants. But halfway through his lecture he talked how reprehensible it was that the media was not focusing enough attention on the high number of dead in Iraq each day. He used and example comparing California with Iraq, not taking into account that WE ARE AT WAR IN IRAQ and not in California.
Rush highlighted this piece below and it highlights how some of us are willing to focus the attention on Iraq and the war dead there for political purposes and we totally ignore countless examples of violent crime in our own country.
I started to put together some stats, but I though screw it, you can do Google research as well as I can.
But take places like Utah that registered 50 homicides in 2005, according to records. That’s up from the 42 reported by the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification in 2004. It’s the highest number of homicides since the state’s abnormally high year of 69 in 2001.
In New York, 2,262 people were killed in 1990, that number is down to about 550 or so.
In the D.C area, there were 466 homicides in 2005, compared with 420 in 2004.
In Prince George’s county with a population of 850,000, had a murder rate of 20 per 100,000.
The article points out that there were 4000 deaths due to car crashes, even that shocked me, and that tis hard to do.
Where is the outrage!?

by Victor Davis Hanson - The American Enterprise Online  - April 2006 

War-torn Iraq has about 26 million residents, a peaceful California perhaps now 35 million. The former is a violent and impoverished landscape, the latter said to be paradise on Earth. But how you envision either place to some degree depends on the eye of the beholder and is predicated on what the daily media appear to make of each.

As a fifth-generation Californian, I deeply love this state, but still imagine what the reaction would be if the world awoke each morning to be told that once again there were six more murders, 27 rapes, 38 arsons, 180 robberies, and 360 instances of assault in California — yesterday, today, tomorrow, and every day. I wonder if the headlines would scream about “Nearly 200 poor Californians butchered again this month!”

How about a monthly media dose of “600 women raped in February alone!” Or try, “Over 600 violent robberies and assaults in March, with no end in sight!” Those do not even make up all of the state’s yearly 200,000 violent acts that law enforcement knows about.

Iraq’s judicial system seems a mess. On the eve of the war, Saddam let out 100,000 inmates from his vast prison archipelago. He himself still sits in the dock months after his trial began. But imagine an Iraq with a penal system like California’s with 170,000 criminals — an inmate population larger than those of Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Singapore combined.

Just to house such a shadow population costs our state nearly $7 billion a year — or about the same price of keeping 40,000 Army personnel per year in Iraq. What would be the image of our Golden State if we were reminded each morning, “Another $20 million spent today on housing our criminals”?

Some of California’s most recent prison scandals would be easy to sensationalize: “Guards watch as inmates are raped!” Or “Correction officer accused of having sex with underaged detainee!” And apropos of Saddam’s sluggish trial, remember that our home state multiple murderer, Tookie Williams, was finally executed in December 2005 — 26 years after he was originally sentenced.

Much is made of the inability to patrol Iraq’s borders with Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Turkey. But California has only a single border with a foreign nation, not six. Yet over 3 million foreigners who snuck in illegally now live in our state. Worse, there are about 15,000 convicted alien felons incarcerated in our penal system, costing about $500 million a year. Imagine the potential tabloid headlines: “Illegal aliens in state comprise population larger than San Francisco!” or “Drugs, criminals, and smugglers given free pass into California!”

Every year, over 4,000 Californians die in car crashes — nearly twice the number of Americans lost so far in three years of combat operations in Iraq. In some sense, then, our badly maintained roads, and often poorly trained and sometimes intoxicated drivers, are even more lethal than Improvised Explosive Devices. Perhaps tomorrow’s headline might scream out at us: “300 Californians to perish this month on state highways! Hundreds more will be maimed and crippled!”

In 2001, California had 32 days of power outages, despite paying nearly the highest rates for electricity in the United States. Before complaining about the smoke in Baghdad rising from private generators, think back to the run on generators in California when they were contemplated as a future part of every household’s line of defense.

We’re told that Iraq’s finances are a mess. Yet until recently, so were California’s. Two years ago, Governor Schwarzenegger inherited a $38 billion annual budget shortfall. That could have made for strong morning newscast teasers: “Another $100 million borrowed today — $3 billion more in red ink to pile up by month’s end!”

So is California comparable to Iraq? Hardly. Yet it could easily be sketched by a reporter intent on doing so as a bank rupt, crime-ridden den with murderous highways, tens of thousands of inmates, with wide-open borders.

I myself recently returned home to California, without incident, from a visit to Iraq’s notorious Sunni Triangle. While I was gone, a drug-addicted criminal with a long list of convictions broke into our kitchen at 4 a.m., was surprised by my wife and daughter, and fled with our credit cards, cash, keys, and cell phones.

Sometimes I wonder who really was safer that week.

 From Michelle Malkin

Remember how pathetic it was when the Left tried to make scandals out of books written by Lynne Cheney and Scooter Libby?

Cheney wrote a pulpy novel, “Sisters,” about a frontier woman that included graphic sexual passages and lesbian lovers. (A conservative-bashing site reprinted excerpts here.)

Libby wrote a pulpy novel, “The Apprentice,” a “story of innocence and temptation” set in turn-of-the-century Japan that included graphic sexual passages–including bestiality and a scene in which the brothers of a dead samurai have sex with his daughter.

Both were works of fiction. You know, stuff that’s made up.

Now, the George Allen campaign has detonated its October surprise using the same tactics as Cheney’s and Libby’s critics–attacking the fiction of his Democrat opponent, James Webb via an official “press release” sent to the Drudge Report last night. Are the passages in Webb’s “Lost Soldiers” bizarre and perverted? Yes. But they are no more proof of Webb’s immorality and unfitness for office than the passages in “Sisters” are proof that Lynne Cheney hates men or that the passages in “The Apprentice” are proof that Scooter Libby endorses sex between children and bears.

John Hawkins, who first highlighted Webb’s fictional work here and here, does make a good point about media double standards:

It goes without saying that any Republican who wrote this sort of thing and ran for office would be absolutely ripped into a thousand pieces by the mainstream media.

Of course, John’s right.

Allah does him one better:

If George Allen had written this book, not only would the left be going berserk, they’d be circulating lists of characters in his other books whom they suspect of being gay.

Heh.

I don’t think, however, that the Allen campaign–couldn’t they leave this to surrogates?–should be trafficking in this late October muck. It is beneath them and there’s plenty else about Webb that is damning.

Like Webb’s lying about leading the “fight” to include an African-American soldier in the Vietnam War soldier’s memorial.

Or his non-fiction writing about women in the military.

And what happened to focusing on Webb’s stance on taxes, as fiscal conservatives in Virginia have been urging?

Political strategists in the Beltway are exulting that “Webb is toast” as a result of this Drudge/Allen bomb. But if this what Republican Senate candidates need to do to win elections, I don’t think any of us should be cheering.

 From Sister Toldjah, Lookie here, another incident of a left wing blogger doin up someone in blackface.
I should be outraged at this but frankly people, I just can’t. I don’t expect any more from liberals.
I already think most liberals are a bunch of pompous, racist fucks anyway.
So how can I be shocked by this?
I’m sure most people who happen to visit PPP likely think much of what I have to say is racist and inappropriate.
Hell I have been told by a few bloggers on the right that they would not link to me because of the language and content I have on my site. Sure, right.
I often wonder is the “outrage” by these bloggers on the right when it comes to these issues of race sincere?
Why would some blogger, especially a white blogger, give a shit about how Negros are portrayed?
Being outraged just for the sake of making a political point is frankly bullshit.
There are things that liberals do that are far more offensive to me.
Yes the blackface crap is racist and stupid, but this is more of a statement of society as a whole rather than a liberal vs conservative argument.

The first time around it was Nutroots activist and Lamont supporter, far lefty blogger Jane Hamsher.

We have another instance of this type of asinine and juvenile behavior happening today. Blue Crab Boulevard has the details of the latest instance of a far left blogger thinking it’s funny and entirely appropriate to create and post an image of someone in blackface.

In both instances - both Hamsher’s and the one BCB notes, you’ll see that the issue that the two people were blackfaced over had nothing whatosever to do with race. I think instances such as these prove that when it comes to having racist tendencies, Democrats have them far more than the public face they’d like you to see.

It may be time for Halloween and thus the time for the wearing of scary costumes, but Democrats wear the mask of “tolerance” year round. However, every once in a while, the mask slips off, and then you understand why they wear it: because what’s underneath it is very, very ugly.

Also blogging about this: Hugh Hewitt, McQ at QandO, John Hawkins, Allah, MY VRWC

Via Blue Crab Boulevard 

Crying Uncle

BLITZER: I have been covering the Cheneys for many years, including on a day-to-day basis when he was the defense secretary during the first Gulf War and I was CNN’s Pentagon correspondent . . . I was surprised when she came out swinging on Friday, surprised . . . at her sniping at my patriotism.

Wolf Blitzer
CNN Late Edition
October 29, 2006

Translation: Oh Lawdy! Massa’s wife so mad she even beatin’ on us house slaves now. What dis ol’ world comin’ to?

 Michael J. Fox tells ABC he has not read Missouri’s Cloning/Stem Cell Amendment…

Fox: Well, I don’t think that’s true. You know, I campaigned for Claire McCaskill. And so I have to qualify it by saying I’m not qualified to speak on the page-to-page content of the initiative. Although, I am quite sure that I’ll agree with it in spirit, I don’t know, I— On full disclosure, I haven’t read it, and that’s why I didn’t put myself up for it distinctly.

 The best example of when you hear people bitching and complaining about how corrupt the members of Congress are, you know they are just blowing smoke out of their asses.
People say they want tighter controls on gubment spending, and more “fiscal responsibility” you know they are lying.
Politics are all about how much can you get for your people.
Who cares that Byrd is a senile, racist crazy old bastard, “he gets us stuff, lots of stuff.” 

Leaning on two canes, Sen. Robert C. Byrd hardly looks like a billion-dollar industry - or “Big Daddy,” as the 88-year-old Democrat calls himself.

No matter: Voters once again are looking beyond Byrd’s age to his political guile - and the truckloads of federal dollars he’s steered to West Virginia - as they consider whether to give him a record ninth term in the Senate.

“It’s not that we deserve more money than other states, but if he wasn’t there, we probably wouldn’t get as much as we should,” said Ally Hagsett, a Marshall University sophomore and Republican. “While he’s alive, we’d better get as much as we can.”

With Byrd, the getting’s often good: In the last decade alone, he’s brought home more than $2.2 billion to West Virginia. Today, it’s difficult to travel more than a few miles without coming across something plastered with his name - a building, a road, even a giant radio telescope.

This summer, the longest-serving senator in U.S. history played up that role when he dedicated the Robert C. Byrd Biotechnology Science Center at Marshall.

“I rolled up my sleeves to do the work in Congress, to secure the federal funding,” Byrd told the crowd. “Yeah, man, you’re looking at Big Daddy!”

Democrats and Republicans alike see the powerful member of the Senate Appropriations Committee as the state’s Santa Claus. And they shrug off any suggestion that Byrd’s age is a handicap: Byrd’s longevity puts him in line to become committee chairman, if Democrats win control of the Senate.

“It’s like he’s been in there 100 years, but that’s all right by me. (more…)

Sphere: Related Content

I found this on My Space, I have seen this in many different forms, white folks ranting about the double standard on racism.
Look I see some valid points stated here, but the energy is ridiculously misplaced.
Let me point out some things along the way, then you white folks who feel slighted can pass this around.
Remember I’m a conservative Negro, so I’ll give you the straight scoop.   

You say that whites commit a lot of violence against you, so why are the ghettos the most dangerous places to live?

You see this implies that all of us Negros are living in Da Hood. I have never lived in any projects or any other urban housing development.
I grew up in a upper middleclass neighborhood the only black family for a number of years and one of only tow black kids for a time.
Our house was burglarized, eggs thrown at it, I was not allowed to go into my white friends homes for the first few years I lived there. This was in the 1970’s.
Crime is high because of drug wars. White folks are the ones who come into the hood to buy their drugs but they get to go home to the burbs.
If people came into your neighborhood to buy drugs you would have a problem too  

You have the United Negro College Fund. You have Martin Luther King Day. You have Black History Month. You have Cesar Chavez Day. You have Yom Hashoah. You have Ma’uled Al-Nabi. You have the NAACP. You have BET.

I’m sorry but this is silly, regardless of how much you want to bitch about “we have this and that” you still are applying your arguments at all black folks.
I have never taken a dime from the UNCF. The Martin Luther King is a celebration for ALL Americans not just black Americans. He fought for the struggle of all Americans. But remember it was your grandparents who were spitting on little children seeking a better live and education.
Oh, you say it was not “your grandparents” well, just like all white people are not racist not all black folks have the same views on Black History month and support the NAACP.
I frankly find the NAACP a damm joke. It was necessary back in the day, because white people had issues with Negros riding on the front of busses, or attending school schools with darkies, denying employment and so on.  

If we had WET (White Entertainment Television), We’d be racists.

You do have WET it’s called NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, FOX, every fucken media outlet but ONE.
I bet the number of black employees who work at these networks in total is less than 5%.
If you include newspapers and other media outlets through the U.S it’s likely less than that.
And you want to bitch about BET? Oh and lets not forget BLACK FOLKS DON’T OWN BET!   
 

If we had a White Pride Day…You would call us racists.

YOU RUN THE FUCKEN COUNTRY, you have virtually every role model at your disposal, how much fucken “pride” do you need.
If you are white in this country and you can’t make it, you just suck. It’s your fucken world. So using black folks or any other minority as an excuse is just retarded.

If we had White History Month . We’d be racists.

Hmm every fucken American History Textbook is written by white folks, American History is white history.
There is an old saying that history is written by the winners, shit YOU WON, what the fuck else do you want?

If we had any organization for only whites to “advance” OUR lives . We’d be racists.

I’ll say it again, if you are white and you can’t make it in this society, you SUCK.
I work on a college campus and I see nothing but white people. All of these potentially college educated white people everywhere and who is teaching them, more white people. Shit even the housekeeping staff and all the maintenance people are white.
What the fuck else do you need. If you truly think you need an organization to help advance you life, dare I say again…YOU SUCK!

We have a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, a Black Chamber of Commerce, and then we just have the plain Chamber of Commerce. Wonder who pays for that?

Well let me ask this, how many black businesses have you spent your money in?
DON’T COUNT RIB JOINTS!

If we had a college fund that only gave white students scholarships… You know we’d be racists.

The federal government gives out BILLIONS of dollars of educational grants. Black folks (particularly black men) are not in college. Just who do you think are taking advantage of all those dead presidents for college, it sure as heel is not black folks.  

There are over 60 openly proclaimed Black Colleges in the US , yet if there were “White colleges” . THAT would be a racist college.

And guess who is taking advantage of these black colleges now, white folks.
There are actually white people smart enough to take advantage of the educational opportunities black colleges provide.
See it’s a funny thing. Black folks attend white dominated universities and they are isolated, while white attends these black colleges and are welcomed (in most cases) with open arms.  

In the Million Man March, you believed that you were marching for your race and rights. If we marched for our race and rights, You would call us racists.

Ok I’ll leave that alone, people who read this will quickly see just how retarded a statement that tis.

You are proud to be black, brown, yellow and orange, and you’re not afraid to announce it. But when we announce our white pride, You call us racists.

Oh this is getting tired…….yawn….

You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us. But, when a White police officer shoots a black gang member or beats up a black drug-dealer running from the law and posing a threat to society,  You call him a racist.

Anybody who looks up crime statistics will find out that most crime, particularly violent crime is committed by member of the same race. So this is beyond retarded.
Let me peep you to something else. As an 8 year old, I was picked up by the police (remember the only black kid in the neighborhood) because when I gave them my address they though I was lying. I was driven around for 30 minutes or so ( I guess to scare me) then I was driven to my home where the officer said to me “boy if you are lying we will take your ass to jail”, remember I’m 8!
So you stupid ass, we all don’t do drugs, we all don’t live in the fucken hood, we all don’t commit crime.     

I am proud, But, you call me a racist, Why is it that only whites can be racists?
There is nothing improper about this.

This nonsense is racist. Keep in mind folks this is a 30 years white woman posting this shit in 2006.

You still think we have racism under control? Better think again.

By Nick Allen - Link

(Bloomberg) — St. Louis, where the hometown Cardinals won the baseball World Series last week, was named the most dangerous city in the U.S. in a study based on FBI figures.

The Missouri city topped a list of 371 metropolitan areas in an assessment of 2005 FBI statistics for murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary and motor vehicle theft. Researchers at Morgan Quitno Press in Lawrence, Kansas, compiled the results in its 13th annual list of the most dangerous and safest cities in the U.S.

“There is some good news,” Morgan Quitno President Scott Morgan said in an e-mailed statement today. “St. Louis’s property crime rate has fallen 14 percent since 2001.”

St. Louis, which has a population of 350,000, was the third- most dangerous city in last year’s rankings and replaced Camden, New Jersey, at the top this time. Detroit was judged the second- most dangerous city and Flint, Michigan, was third. Washington was 19th, Los Angeles was 122nd and New York was 227th.

The safest city in the U.S. was Brick, New Jersey, followed by Amherst, New York, and Mission Viejo, California. Brick has ranked as one of the top five safest U.S. cities in each of the past six years.

Several cities were not included in the list because of incomplete crime information. Chicago and other Illinois cities were missing because of a discrepancy between the way they track rape figures and the FBI’s reporting guidelines. A separate calculation without the rape category showed Chicago as the 52nd most dangerous city in the U.S., Morgan Quitno Press said.

The Midwest experienced the steepest increase in violent crime, 5.7 percent, in the U.S. in 2005, according to FBI figures released in June. The murder rate in St. Louis jumped 16 percent compared to 4.8 percent nationally.

Obviously we don’t want Walmart or it would have gone up already. Who wants Walmart around when they are obviously trying to screw us. Disgusting.

Don’t ya just love when moronic people claim to speak for you

I dislike Lawrence as it is. I shop less & less in Lawrence every month (because of my location) & once Douglas Co. closes the Lecompton bridge in April (for 5+ months)I see myself in Lawrence even less. Even though it will bring more jobs Walmart should let it go & spend the money on a building in North Topeka. Oh wait my bad I think they already are! I guess my money will be going to my local grocer & Topeka for bigger purchases. Come to think of it I’ll even save on gas too.

Then take yo ass back to Topeka! 

I feel the same way, Redneckwoman. I am so disgusted with Lawrence that I stopped shopping there. I am now buying all my stuff in Topeka because I don’t want Lawrence to get any of my money and I have found the prices to be MUCH cheaper. I am saving gas money as well. The Lecompton bridge closing was the clincher but these fights to stop free economy just sickens me. Lawrence was a wonderful city when I lived there 15 years ago and it has gone downhill quickly since. (or maybe my eyes have finally been opened.)

Good lets weed out the liberal gene pool

If WalMart goes up, I will seriously rethink my residency here.

Don’t let the doorknob hit ya stupid ass…well you know.

Marion, S.T.F.U, I think everyone is tired of your rambling. I think WalMart should put a supersized pawn & crook shop in thier store. That way Marion can get away for the news for a while and experience the wonder that is WalMart, minimum wage part-time no healthinsurance overtime shortpaying goodness. P.S. They also hire immigrants for late night cleanup and stocking work for less than $4hr. If you buy from WalMart you unanimously support thier money leeching corporate criminalism, and you have no respect for your neighbors or thier jobs.

NO YOU SHUT THE FUCK UP, WE ARE ALL TIRED OF YOUR RAMBLING!

These people bitching about and issue they really don’t give a shit about because if they did they would have engaged themselves in the planning process right from the start.
You see, I’ve been there and done that.
I worked with neighborhood associations and developers in plaining the right design and community framework to get the best outcome for all involved.
Not just on big box store issues but planning issues from roads, infrastructure, schools, planing and zoning and not for profit issues.

So it’s is off the charts silly for people to get on the Journal World site and spends hours banging on a keyboard bitching about something they could have involved themselves in from the start, but they were too fucken busy then, but now you have time to blow by posting a bunch of tired rhetoric?
 
I posted a small portion of the bitching and complaining first to just show you the type of crap idiots will say not grasping the fact that most of us just don’t give a shit about what they said,
all in the name of being heard,  just to try and make people believe that they know what the fuck they are talking about, to try and be relevant.
 
The same old tired “Walmart bad” bullshit that every community across the country has been ranting about for years.
The post below is written by someone who has sane insight and has tried to get her point across.
I invited her to post here just so she can let off some steam.

I said to her why bother?
The Lawrence city commissioners are a bunch of fucken dolts who would rather waste taxpayers money fighting a lawsuit they can’t win rather than work with Walmart on a solution that would be good for all.
But they are caught up by these hypocritical liberal skanks and their mental masturbation rants of evil corporate greed. So they have to kiss some political ass.
When you know the minute this new store opens (and it will open eventually) they will take their tired asses right into the store to pick up the latest sale item and usual good deal Walmart provides.

What Lady G provides are the basic facts, not all of this “if Walmart opens, I’ll move” or “I’ll take my money elsewhere!” bullshit.

When I read shit like that I wonder, do you really think I give a fuck you stupid bastards where you shop or spend your money, or who you will give your next blowjob to?
I mean seriously.
Do you mutherfuckers who get on these sites actually think that when you post multiple simplistic and meaningless rants about shit that nobody cares about that people care what you have to say, particularly after you have said it multiple times!?

How many fucken times and ways can you anti Walmart dolts say “Walmart is bad”?
What they pay and the benefits they provide are the business of the people who apply there, are none of your fucken business.

In addition If you have a small business and Walmart hurts your business you either have to reinvent yourself or pack yo shit up.
I want to keep as much money in my fucken pocket as I can and if Walmart will sell me laundry soap for 3 fucken dollars less that you will, who the fuck do you think I’m going to buy from.    

These city council member are members of or part owners of, or friends of people who invest in this local mercantile market, which is a fucken ripoff.
They sell a bunch or “organic” shit but everything is priced 20 percent higher.
It’s all about the money, even for liberals. But they just want to hide behind the “corporate greed is evil tag”, that means “they care.”

Anywho…the post…
 ———————–

By Lady Guinivere - Guest Writer

The people in Lawrence are having a melt down, as they divide into two camps: The I hate Walmart (at least one on the west side of town) and the we love Wallmart. They applaud or attack the current city council as it waffle dances back and forth. The two citizen camps post hundreds of comments on both sides. Bad Walmart. Good Walmart. And they are all missing the boat. This is a done deal, legally. No matter what you think of the issue, the legalities entirely favor Walmart.

A little history.

The prior city council approved this new mega-store to be built near the new highschool (free state). Never mind whether they should have done so, they did. Then, a new batch of city commissioners were elected (perhaps in reaction to that approval). Sure enough, the newly elected “hippy” majority yanked approval. A law suit by Walmart developers quickly followed. On the very day that the matter was to go to court, a settlement was reached. Wallmart would be allowed to build, just not the mega-store. But that wasn’t the end of the story. The most recent move in the city leader’s waffle dance was the council’s 2^nd change of heart and mind. They’ve backed off their settlement agreement. So Wallmart has taken the city back into court, this time demanding the whole enchilada (they‘re back to wanting the giant store). And if this matter actually goes to a judge, they will get exactly what they original council approved; the big mega-store. Like or hate Wallmart, at all or just in this location, the original council’s approval sealed the outcome.

It’s called Vested Property Rights people. Look up that phrase on www.google.com or something. In summary, it means that once the government has recognized your rights or given you something of value, it’s yours forever (or until you decide to give it up). The government can no longer deny it to you, unless they take it for public use, and then they have to pay you “just compensation” (what it is worth on the market).

(more…)

Sphere: Related Content

Let ole Snoop be clear on something. There are some folks that have been peeping my blog ever since my old one “The Snoop Zone”. So they have heard the following rant  from me countless numbers of times. To those people, sorry for repeating.
So to those of you who don’t know, in regards to my politics I am a conservative and a Republican.
I have said to anyone who will listen, this blog is not about me trying to convince black folks that they should vote Republican just too simply dis Democrats.
All I have ever said is, since black people have voted 90% Democrat for the last 35 plus years you have to ask yourself what the fuck has Democrats done for blacks?
No other ethnic group votes exclusively for one party or another, not whites, not Muslims, not Mexicans, Chinese, Japanese, Indian whoever. It simply is not logical.
Democrats don’t nor will they ever care about black folks or put black folks in positions of power because they believe that “those niggas will vote for us no matter what we do.”
How else do you explain the flunkie status of Jackson, Sharpton, Belefonte, Glover, Whoppi and so on. These people get paid to keep Negors, dumb, ignorant and dependent.   
That pattern must change. I think it is slowly, but surely.
To those black folks that happen to peep this, I read tons of liberal content every day and none of them even address the importance of the black vote.
Other than the occasional good word for Obama they don’t give a shit about what Negros think.
The same second class status blacks are given in the media, the nation’s newsrooms, in Washington and even in liberal blogsphere the Democratic Party perpetuates that second class status.
This article in not pointing out anything new, but you sure as hell won’t see stories like this on MSM sources.
Let liberals and Democrats ignore this at their own peril.     

(Article/ By By Deborah Simmons - Washington Times) Blacks aren’t necessarily mad as hell, but they certainly aren’t taking it anymore. Times, they are a’changin’ — at last.
Shackled to the Democratic Party ever since the “Great Society” ushered in Head Start, the War on Poverty and historic civil rights legislation, black Americans — particlarly those who most benefitted from those heady days of the 1960s — are asking party leaders a profound question: “What have you done for me lately?”

Perhaps nowhere is the unshackling more prevalent than in Maryland’s Senate race, where a black Catholic Republican, Michael Steele, and a white Jewish Democrat, Ben Cardin, are head-to-head. While the historic significance of the race is lost on neither party — only Illinois and Massachusetts have elected black senators in modern-day America — the fact that blacks are crossing the partyline to support a Republican is being lost on the Democratic Party.

Indeed, both state and national party leaders were forewarned: Shun Kweisi Mfume’s Senate run and we’ll vote black. Well, guess what happened after Mr. Cardin got his way? The Democrats began unshackling themselves.
Black Democrats voiced their discontent. In fact, many former stalwarts endorsed Mr. Steele the week after Mr. Cardin defeated Mr. Mfume in the Demcratic primary. Said Judge Billy Murphy, an adviser to Maryland’s Republican governor: “Like so many people, who have come out today, I’m sick and tired of being taken for granted.” Another Democrat, lawyer A. Dwight Pettit, stood with Mr. Steele, too. Mr. Pettit pointed out, as other Democrats have, the lack of support from Maryland’s bluer-than-blue Democratic “bosses.” Mr. Pettit’s case is especially insightful. Not only did Democratic leaders ignore his candidacy for Baltimore state’s attorney in 1978, but they shunned his 1976 nomination for U.S. attorney by President Carter.

Who did they support instead? White candidates. Said Mr. Pettit: “We are on a national stage right now in Maryland to show that if the Republican Party reaches out to African-American communities, they are not foreclosed on immediately. The question is: What has the Democratic Party done for the African-American community.”
(As I wrote this column yesterday, Mr. Cardin, the white candidate, had turned down an offer from the NAACP to debate Michael Steele. Isn’t that a slap in the face? I can still remember well the names President Bush was called for not meeting with the NAACP.)

But not all “Steele Democrats” come from Baltimore, which is Mr. Cardin’s neck of the woods. They are all over Maryland — and you can find out who they are if you pay attention to what they are not saying. Maryland black caucus Democrats — i.e., those who already are members of the Congressional Black Caucus — are not attacking their Republican brother and it’s fairly obvious why. But for the benefit of those of who don’t, listen to my congresswoman. Eleanor Holmes Norton put it this way: “I think it is a tactical decision. If [Mr. Steele] has a large or fairly large black vote, why or how could you alienate that vote by going after him doing personal attacks? There’s just no way.”

It seems most of Mr. Steele’s fellow blacks fully grasped that strategic position. Then there’s “Brother Elijah Cummings” of Baltimore, who’s not even looking for the keys to the shackles. Unenlightened Democrats and other liberal souls call people like Mr. Steele all sorts of names. “Sellout.” “Bush Republican.”

Hmm. I wonder if those were “sellouts” who rejected Rep. Harold Ford Jr., a black Democrat, when he wanted to be House majority leader. (A white woman, Nancy Peolsi, bears that title instead.) I wonder if Mr. Cummings, who spent 16 years in the Maryland General Assembly with the good ol’ blue boys, was being forthright to Maryland voters in general and black Marylanders in particular about Mr. Steele. In September, Mr. Cummings said this about Mr. Steele: “We do not know who Michael Steele is, and we do not know what he stands for.” But in October, Mr. Cummings said this about his brother: “All you have to do is ask him where he is on issues … and Bush policies.” Mr. Mfume, for whom I have much respect for his candor about Democrats and their bigoted ways, lost his Maryland Senate bid because the Democrats who run the state and national party machines had decided long ago that they wanted a Paul Sarbanes clone, and Mr. Mfume failed the litmus test.

The Senate race in Maryland is exposing dirty little Democratic secre